About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
in a last, desperate attempt to hold up -- you know to keep assad in power. hezbollah fighters are coming in and they are being armed with weapons from iran, flying over iraqi air space. starting immediately, iraq should heed the warn from this united states and disallow these military flights over its air space. >> shannon: quickly, we are almost out of time. a final thought here on this issue? >> well, i agree with what the chairman just said. i think in a bipartisan manner, congress needs to, obviously, try to -- to take control of this. assad is a brutal dictator and from a humanitarian point of view, he needs to g. but another thing ask thaiz very important. assad is iran's guy. assad, if he goes is a blow to iran. weapons going into lebanon, when the second lob none war was over between ezhezbollah and israel, hezbollah would not be allowed to re-arm. hezbollah is two or three times as strong as they were. they have been re-arming from iran, through syria, into lebanon. so assad is a bad guy. he is iran's guy. he has a stake in this and so do we. we ought to exert. it i think it's v
at them from gaza. they have chemical weapons in syria. they have hezbollah in their north. they have iran trying to build a nuclear weapon to eliminate them. the muslim brotherhood president of egypt. that strikes me as attacking the victim. >> greta: let me talk about the bigger picture issue. is this impossible for an american president? so many tried it, so many secretary of state's tried it and we manage the crisis from time to time, but the peace seems to be so elusive. >> i sometimes have trouble about being too candid about this. there is no peace process. this is nonsense. this is stuff western politicians do to feel good about themselves. hamas is dedicated to the destruction of israel. iran is dedicated to the destruction of israel. there are factions in syria dedicated to the destruction of israel. hezbollah is dedicated to the destruction of israel. muslim brotherhood want to destroy israel and elected the president. >> why did he go now in the second term? didn't seem to give much attention in the first term. why now? >> i have no idea. i think his polling numbers have gone
for safekeeping. given the fact hezbollah and any number of terrorist organizations are lurking around one corner or the next of any syrian city, who knows what's going on there. there's no guarantee anyone has control over these weapons. the fact of the matter is putting boots on the ground at this point is not going to solve the problem of where these wmd stockpiles go. >> dana, this has an eerie echo of that other despotic leader, saddam hussein, who used chemical weapons against the kurds in 1996. is this the next desperate act of a man who's about to use power? >> well, let's hope not, martin. and particularly on the tenth anniversary of the iraq war, the administration is certainly being very careful not to be responding to what just may be some half-baked reports that my colleagues are picking up that same element of skepticism that this is something real. but obviously as the ambassador was saying, if this is something real, the administration's previous statements have left very little wiggle room and they will have to respond. so certainly the caution upfront is very justified. >> indee
as the country fragments following in the hands of al qaeda, maybe hezbollah and being used against israel in jerusalem and all around this country, shep. >> shepard: ed, it still seems unclear whether either side used chemical weapons. >> that's right. now, the israeli intelligence minister today said he believes that chemical weaponsy were, in fact, used. the republican house intelligence chairman mike rogers back in washington went on cbs news and said he also believes that chemical weapons have been used inside syria in recent days. he added an important caveat. take a listen. >> there is a high probability that a chemical agent was used in aleppo. now, again, i'm an old fbi guy. i like to see forensic evidence. >> now, on top of all of this, there was testimony today in a house committee where the u.s. ambassador to syria basically said that he believes that the syrian regime has now lost control of the border with turkey and iraq and in jordan tonight which the president by the way will be visiting on friday. there is fears about a refugee crisis. refugee spilling out of syria into j
from outside from iran on -- and hezbollah on one side and from saudi arabia, qatar and other states on the other. if there's any hope of diffusing the conflict, one way is going to have to deal with the issues of iranian support. iran is deeply concerned because syria is the major foothold in the arab world. there's a long standing syria through the decline or democrat myself of the assad regime, which i think is inevitable, will be a serious blow to iran. >> so if you have washington, sir, on one side of the scale and tehran on the other, who does baghdad more closely align with? >> well, our hope is, of course, that it will be a truly democratic regime which will be primarily loyal to the interests of the people in iraq and that their views will be consistent with others in supporting and strengthening democratic institutions. but as with many of the other countries in the middle east, there are a whole series of conflicting interests there and it will play out over a long period of time. but our interest is in democratic institutions, democratic societies who will serve their peo
they have to be worried about hezbollah to their right. >> alisyn: they need each other. the president, president obama and benjamin netanyahu need each other. we need to have a good relationship between these two countries. netanyahu famously was close to mitt romney. they were students together i think at harvard business school and worked together for a while. but these two, maybe this is the first step in these two forging some sort of closer bond. >> steve: we showed you the video of the president coming down the stairs of air force one not too long ago here on the program. what's interesting, the microphone kind of picks it up. we want you -- we've been wondering whether or not the charm offensive was real. listen to what the president here in this country, not the charm offensive in israel -- listen to what the president says to bb netanyahu when they greet just moments ago. >> i couldn't get away from congress. [ laughter ] >> steve: he said, it's good to get away from congress. and then there was a little laugh. >> brian: does he understand he's always got a microphone on? >>
's not about shiite and sunni and hezbollah. i think the real urgent issue i think they have to move forward because we are witness to a great tragedy in that part of the world. >> but, alex, it always turns back to the united states. afghanistan, after 9/11. iraq when, you know, a lot of our allies, other than french, the french were saying, got weapons of mass destruction we have to do about it now in syria. do we continue to exist in the middle of an international order where nothing is done unless it's kids from kansas and california and upstate new york and florida that do the fighting? >> yeah. i think this is one of those moments where, i think, you can almost sense the internal conflict in the white house giving the agagenocide. i don't know how the president will commit any troops given the state of affair of our troops when they return home, 600,000 veterans are stale waiting for their claims to send more boys and women, men and women over there. it would not seem to be any actual support for that. at the same time, how do you reconcile that with the blood shed? 70,000 people are d
will use it. the real danger is hezbollah gets it and would use it on israel. that's the great fear that i have. >>brian: general, how do you know all this stuff about agents? was that a focus of yours? >> i used to be in command of a unit that used to have that mission before we signed the chemical weapons treaty. i'm intimately familiar with using them, storing them, putting them on airplanes. this is with fighters we had them. and that is a very difficult area to work on. and i had a great deal of experience with that. of course we no longer use them and it's no longer in our inventory. >>brian: we know the president said that's a red line. we think we know where this stuff is housed. can we go with an airstrike, blow it up and not poison the surrounding population? >> no. i think you'd have secondary fallout and it would go -- i think you've got to seize it on the ground. you could do that. you'd have to hit it very extensively and try to pulverize it but there would be greater risk on that. >>brian: what are the chances of the return address on these chemicals being iraq? >> i think t
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)